User talk:DarthKitty
Well then, I've created an account here, obviously, and uh... I guess that's all for now. --DK 03:12, August 31, 2010 (UTC) HTML vs Wikicode I noticed that you recently changed the format of the code for MARDEK item boxes from wikicode to HTML. HTML may be somewhat easier to read (though I'm more familiar with wikicode), but since most other templates are in wikicode, I didn't think the change was really necessary, unless if you intend to change the format of the other templates as well. (I hope I didn't sound arrogant or anything - just noting an issue here). - Dragonshark 20:49, June 2, 2012 (UTC) :Also, just to clarify things, I'm talking about the code format change from wikicode to HTML, not the change in design. - Dragonshark 20:56, June 2, 2012 (UTC) :I do indeed intend to eventually change all of the templates into mostly-HTML form, like the item boxes. I have a couple of reasons for this: :* As you mentioned, HTML is somewhat easier to read than wikicode. It's easy to get lost in some of the larger templates, such as MonstersMARDEK, without doing a lot of looking into wikicode - something I doubt the majority of editors want to do if they want to make a few small tweaks. :* Many of the older templates have deprecations splattered all across their being. However, things deprecations are harder to spot in wikitext. Converting to HTML is the easiest way to spot and remove deprecations. :That being said, I do see your point about template edits which do almost nothing besides increase the page's size. Even so, I think HTML templates are overall a good idea. :--DK 05:23, June 3, 2012 (UTC) ::OK, thanks for explaining. I guess I should become more familiar with HTML now. - Dragonshark 14:56, June 3, 2012 (UTC) Mardek Item Boxes While the line breaks in the ways to obtain sections really add clarity to the layout, now that I'm getting to consumables and reagents, the item boxes are ending up really long with lots of empty space. Now this isn't as big a deal as it would have been before you made the hide content thing, but I was just wondering: What do you think about combining Found and Dropped By into a double table (similar to Properties and Skills, but without the superheading and different colour scheme)? Firecrow91 23:03, June 11, 2012 (UTC) :Have I mentioned that I'm working on a reformatted version of the item template? Well, I am, and vertical length is one of the things I'm trying to fix. An item with all parameters filled- multiple values for some parameters, even -is quite extensive. I've found a way, I think, to shorten item boxes by listing parameters horizontally. :I'm about 2/3 done, I'd estimate. I might even finish today, but I probably won't. Most likely it will be done tomorrow or the day after. :Also, I agree with the gist of your idea - like things ought to be grouped together, such as the methods of obtaining. Separate enough to give readers an idea of the different methods of obtaining, but grouped enough that a connection is apparent, like the Character Effects. I'll take that into account. :--DK 00:00, June 12, 2012 (UTC) ::I noticed that you're trying to implement the methods of obtaining by listing every possible combination of methods. However, I recently thought of a more efficient way of doing this, and it hopefully should work. (I tested this idea somewhat on my sandbox.) ::If you're placing the methods of obtaining into two columns, the only real problem with this layout is when to start a new row after the previous row has been filled. However, you don't know which parameters are specified, which makes it difficult to do so. My method should hopefully fix this by using the modulus operator. (If you don't know what that is, it finds the remainder of a division problem, eg 7 modulus 3 equals 1). It checks to see whether a new row needs to be created as follows: Before the code for each method of obtaining (except for initial and find), it assigns a number for each of the method of obtaining params that come before the following param, 1 if the parameter is specified, and 0 if it is not, and sums them with an #expr statement. Then, it will check to see if the sum gives a remainder of 0 when divided by 2, using a modulus statement. If it is, the previous row will be ended and a new row will be created. For example, before craft (if craft is specified), it will check initial, find, drop, and buy. Given that initial and drop are the only two params specified, the sum will be 2, and a new row will be created for craft because the sum is divisible by 2, meaning that the template should appear like this: ::INITIAL DROP ::CRAFT ::However, if buy is also specified in addition to those two, the sum will be 3, and a new row will not be created for craft because the sum is not divisible by 2. The template should now look like this: ::INITIAL DROP ::BUY CRAFT ::This idea will need some tweaking before it's implemented into the template, but I hope this makes sense. - Dragonshark 16:45, June 12, 2012 (UTC) :::First things first: there's a bit of a misunderstanding which needs clarification. The parameter and the parameter's title ( } being a parameter and Initially Equipped On being that parameter's title) are horizontally aligned. Each value for a parameter (such as Goznor Weapon Shop) is horizontally listed, with between each (instead of a line-break). Both of these save loads of vertical space on templates. :::I've also gotten rid of many of the containing boxes, using a box to contain the whole thing, a box (which is colored differently in two places for readability) for the main item heading, and a box for each subheading. It looks more like the MARDEK monster template, with lots of empty space for readability, rather than the current item template, with boxes within boxes within a box. :::Finally, thank you for the information about the mod operation. I've never heard of that before! (Although, I'm only really a novice scripter, so I suppose that's to be expected.) That and it inspired me to take another look at the available operators, and try to find a simpler solution. I found one which takes one line of code to check for any of the parameters, a series of trs, ths, and tds, and six ifs to see if there's data for a particular parameter. Much better than my 127-line (not including all of the tables) piece I spent much of yesterday writing. :::So yes, thank you, and also hopefully that misunderstanding is cleared up now. :::--DK 23:11, June 12, 2012 (UTC) ::::You're welcome, even with the misunderstanding. - Dragonshark 23:57, June 12, 2012 (UTC) Admin rights? Would you like to become an administrator of the wiki? Your template redesigns and other plans show you have the knowledge and commitment needed for additional rights. I'm not going to be very active for awhile and my motivation to edit has been low recently, but I'll think you'll help move the wiki in the right direction. - Dragonshark (talk) 22:40, August 23, 2012 (UTC) :Uh, sure! I'd love to help! ...Er, more than I already do, that is. But yeah, that would be swell. :--DK 03:19, August 24, 2012 (UTC) ::I'm not a bureaucrat though, and none of the bureaucrats here are active, so I'll have to request bureaucrat rights from Wikia staff. Then, I'll be able to promote you :) - Dragonshark (talk) 06:00, August 24, 2012 (UTC) :::I requested bureaucrat rights on Wikia Central, but unfortunately the Wikia staff want a community discussion about your promotion first. Even though I'm pretty sure you'll be a fine administrator and others won't have a problem with it, I'll start one so you can be promoted hopefully soon. - Dragonshark (talk) 02:18, September 13, 2012 (UTC) ::::Cool. I suppose then that the long dramatic pause was on Wikia's behalf? ::::DarthKitty (talk) 00:41, September 14, 2012 (UTC) :::::Yeah, pretty much. It took weeks before a staffer responded to my request. - Dragonshark (talk) 21:19, September 14, 2012 (UTC) :Hi. I came back to re-check on Dragonshark's request today (we generally let blogs stay up a week) and found he hasn't been editing, but you had. So I gave you the admin rights directly. Good luck with it! -- Wendy (talk) 01:50, September 23, 2012 (UTC) ::Cool, thanks! ::DarthKitty (talk) 05:13, September 23, 2012 (UTC) Couldya help me a bit? I assume that you will read this faster than Wikia Customer Service, or whatstheycalled, and I hope that admins have some power over it... I got kind of auto-banned moments ago, because I was editing all the Monster Type pages from BSigner to include a screenshot of bestiary. Only I was going to upload all the picture after I finished linking, so system assumed that I'm just vandalising the pages. Any chance you can, ya know, unban me, so I can finish the job, and not leave a crapload of broken links on those pages? :Either Wikia staff are moving at near-light speed today, or you aren't blocked at all. I just tried unblocking you, and it gave me an error, so either you aren't blocked now, you never were blocked, or this is something that I can't fix. If the latter, the block will probably be removed in a few minutes to a few hours. :DarthKitty (talk) 00:06, February 11, 2013 (UTC) :::Yeah, well, seems that It was probably some error on wikia, as I actually got auto-banned sever times, each time it displayed a month-long ban, and only lasted from 3 to 10 minutes...Well, Sorry for bothering you! :::Michos (talk) 00:18, February 11, 2013 (UTC) Hey, just a quick note, while a lot of the guides, maps and other lists are wonderfully formatted, the Quests page has a rather glaring problem. The default rendering (at least on my computer) has the dark brown boxes with a dull blue text color that is just painful to try and read. Is this by design, so people have to highlight to avoid unwanted spoilers? It just seems really counter to a wiki with so much greatly available, easy-to-read, easy-to-search content, and then the Quests page is broken in design (but great in its depth of content). I tried editing it myself, but there was no text color adjust control I could quickly locate. The hyperlink blues are easy enough to read, but te main body text is very flat and almost camouflaged by the brown background. Thanks for any time you can send on this. :Sorry about that. We're currently going through some major redesign, and some things are gonna be broken or unreadable for a little while, until someone works them out. I'll probably redo the quests page once I'm finished with my current project, which will probably be in a couple of days. :We're also kind of low on staff right now, which means progress is pretty slow. =/ :DarthKitty (talk) 21:33, May 1, 2013 (UTC)